Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion
|
10-18-2014, 05:57 PM
Post: #6
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion
Yes, you are.
Free42: SIN(3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 503) = -1.15802 83060 06248 94179 02505 54076 922 e-34, correct to 34 digits WP34S: SIN(3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 503) = -1.15802 83060 06248 91773 57874 54453 501 e-34, correct to 17 digits Werner 41CV†,42S,48GX,49G,DM42,DM41X,17BII,15CE,DM15L,12C,16CE |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Messages In This Thread |
Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion - BruceH - 10-15-2014, 09:31 PM
RE: Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion - jebem - 10-16-2014, 09:53 PM
RE: Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion - pito - 10-18-2014, 07:14 AM
RE: Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion - Werner - 10-18-2014, 04:40 PM
RE: Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion - pascal_meheut - 10-18-2014, 05:32 PM
RE: Intel underestimates error bounds by 1.3 quintillion - Werner - 10-18-2014 05:57 PM
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)